Redsec
Hello EA / DICE Team,
I’ve spent a significant amount of time playing Battlefield REDSEC, and I want to provide focused gameplay feedback based on how matches actually unfold. This feedback is not about comparisons for the sake of comparison, but about systems that directly affect pacing, player agency, and engagement throughout a match.
At the moment, several REDSEC systems feel intentionally designed to avoid similarities with other BRs, but in doing so they remove mechanics that solve real gameplay problems. The result is that players often feel punished by timers, fixed systems, or RNG rather than rewarded for smart decisions and successful play.
Below is a breakdown of the specific issues and the reasons behind each suggestion.
1) Comeback mechanics rely too heavily on passive waiting
Current behavior
Reviving teammates requires interacting with fixed redeploy beacons/towers and standing in place while a countdown completes.
Why this is a gameplay problem
- Standing still in a BR is inherently unsafe and discourages momentum.
- Redeploy locations become predictable camp points.
- The system replaces player decision-making with forced waiting.
Suggested improvement
- Add a money economy and buy stations.
- Allow players to buy teammate redeploys.
- Keep redeploy beacons as a secondary option, not the only method.
Buy station scope (important clarification)
To keep the system focused and prevent feature bloat, buy stations should be limited to only three items:
- Buying back a teammate
- Buying a loadout
- Buying armor plates
Nothing else should be purchasable. This keeps buy stations strategic without turning them into an overcomplicated shop system.
This gives squads multiple comeback paths and turns reviving teammates into a strategic decision rather than a passive interaction.
2) Early “free return” system creates inconsistency and should be replaced
Current behavior
Early in the match, deaths are not always final, but this system shuts off early and changes the rules mid-match.
Why this is a problem
- Early fights feel inconsistent in terms of consequences.
- The cutoff feels arbitrary rather than skill-based.
- Once it ends, teams can be eliminated abruptly without a fair recovery option.
Suggested improvement
- Remove the early free-return system entirely.
- Replace it with a Gulag-style, skill-based comeback.
This maintains pacing while keeping rules consistent and fair throughout the match.
3) Player movement speed slightly slows overall match flow
Observation
Movement speed is just slow enough that rotations, repositioning, and engagement pacing feel dragged out.
Why this matters
- Slower movement increases downtime between fights.
- Third-party engagements and flanking feel less fluid.
Suggested improvement
- Slightly increase movement speed (small tuning adjustment, not arcade-level).
This would noticeably tighten match pacing without changing the overall feel of the game.
4) Loadout system lacks player control and creates unfair outcomes
Current situation
REDSEC currently has:
- Free/global loadout drops (these should remain a global event and land wherever they land)
- Mission-earned loadout drops
There is no option to buy loadouts, and mission-earned drops are not player-placed.
Why this is frustrating
- When a loadout is earned through a mission, it can land in a contested area or directly near another team.
- Another squad can take a loadout your team earned.
- This turns a reward into an RNG gamble rather than a payoff for success.
Suggested improvements
REDSEC should support three loadout paths:
- Buyable loadouts from buy stations (currently missing)
- Free/global loadout drops (these should stay as-is and land wherever they land; players should not be able to place these)
- Mission-earned loadouts
For buy-station loadouts and mission-earned loadouts only, squads should be able to mark/throw where the loadout lands (within reasonable limits).
Free/global loadout drops should remain a global event with fixed landing behavior.
This preserves risk while ensuring players maintain ownership over earned rewards.
5) Vehicle handling feels more difficult than necessary
Observation
Helicopter and tank controls feel awkward rather than skill-based.
Why this matters
- Battlefield’s identity relies heavily on vehicle gameplay.
- If vehicles feel clunky, fewer players use them, reducing variety and identity.
Suggested improvement
- Improve steering responsiveness and control feel.
- Vehicles should feel heavy and powerful, not unresponsive.
6) Proximity chat should be fully distance-based
Current limitation
There is no true proximity chat system with realistic distance scaling.
Why this matters
- Distance-based proximity chat adds tension, awareness, and emergent moments.
- It enhances close-quarters gameplay and social interaction.
Suggested improvement
- Implement proximity chat that scales volume and clarity based on distance.
7) Partial friendly fire would add depth without griefing
Suggested system
- Enable friendly fire at approximately 30–35% damage.
Why
- Encourages disciplined positioning and grenade use.
- Adds consequence without heavily punishing casual play.
8) Missions work well, but the highest-value contracts should be physical and contested
What works
- Menu-based missions that can be started from inventory are flexible and should remain unchanged.
What’s missing
- High-value, physical contracts that naturally pull squads into conflict.
Suggested improvement
- Add elite physical contracts that spawn dynamically between active POIs where squads are present.
- These should offer the best rewards and serve as match-defining objectives.
This creates organic fights and reduces dead zones without forcing players into scripted engagements.
Closing
REDSEC does not need to imitate other BRs, but it does need systems that:
- Reduce passive waiting
- Reward player decision-making
- Prevent earned rewards from being lost to RNG
- Keep matches active after early setbacks
The suggestions above aim to improve pacing, fairness, and engagement while preserving REDSEC’s identity as a Battlefield experience.
Thank you for taking the time to review this feedback.
Respectfully,
A Battlefield REDSEC player
